The concept of intervertebral fusion for the cervical and lumbar spine following a discectomy was generally introduced in the 1960s. It involved coring out a bone graft from the hip and implanting the graft into the disc space. The disc space was prepared by coring out the space to match the implant. The advantages of this concept were that it provided a large surface area of bone to bone contact and placed the graft under loading forces that allowed osteoconduction and induction enhancing bone fusion. However, the technique is seldom practiced today due to numerous disadvantages including lengthy operation time, destruction of a large portion of the disc space, high risk of nerve injury, and hip pain after harvesting the bone graft.
Presently, at least two devices are commonly used to perform the intervertebral portion of an intervertebral body fusion: the first is the distraction device and the second is the intervertebral body fusion device, often referred to as a cage. Cages can be implanted as standalone devices or as part of a circumferential fusion approach with pedicle screws and rods. The concept is to introduce an implant that will distract a collapsed disc and decompress the nerve root, allow load sharing to enhance bone formation and to implant a device that is small enough to allow implantation with minimal retraction and pulling on nerves.
In a typical intervertebral body fusion procedure, a portion of the intervertebral disc is first removed from between the vertebral bodies. This can be done through either a direct open approach or a minimally invasive approach. Disc shavers, pituitary rongeours, curettes, and/or disc scrapers can be used to remove the nucleus and a portion of either the anterior or posterior annulus to allow implantation and access to the inner disc space. The distraction device is inserted into the cleared space to enlarge the disc space and the vertebral bodies are separated by actuating the distraction device. Enlarging the disc space is important because it also opens the foramen where the nerve root exists. It is important that during the distraction process one does not over-distract the facet joints. An intervertebral fusion device is next inserted into the distracted space and bone growth factor, such as autograft, a collagen sponge with bone morphogenetic protein, or other bone enhancing substance may be inserted into the space within the intervertebral fusion device to promote the fusion of the vertebral bodies.
Intervertebral fusion and distraction can be performed through anterior, posterior, oblique, and lateral approaches. Each approach has its own anatomic challenges, but the general concept is to fuse adjacent vertebra in the cervical thoracic or lumbar spine. Devices have been made from various materials. Such materials include cadaveric cancellous bone, carbon fiber, titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK). Devices have also been made into different shapes such as a bean shape, football shape, banana shape, wedge shape and a threaded cylindrical cage.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,070,598 and 7,087,055 to Lim et al. disclose minimally invasive devices for distracting the disc space. The devices include scissor-jack-like linkages that are used to distract a pair of endplates associated with adjacent vertebra from a first collapsed orientation to a second expanded orientation. A pull arm device is used to deliver and distract the device in the disc space. However, the device is primarily used for distraction and not subsequent vertebral fusion. The device would not work as a fusion device, because once the pull arm is disconnected from the device, the device will not be stable enough to maintain proper spacing of the vertebrae until fusion can occur. The endplates of the device are also solid and do not permit bone growth for successful fusion.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0114367 to Meyer discloses a device that uses a scissor-jack-like arrangement to distract a disc space. To solve the instability problem of the scissor-jack arrangement, a curable polymer is injected to fill the disc space and the distraction device is disabled from attempting to support the load. The curable polymer and disabling of the device are necessary because the device could not adequately support the distracted disc space. The base plates of the device have at least two or more degrees of freedom, collectively, in a distracted position and are therefore not stable under the loads encountered supporting the disc space. Absent injection of the polymer, and the support and control supplied by the implanting physician via the removable distraction tool, the base plates would collapse, which could cause severe damage to the vertebral bodies.
Accordingly, there is a need in the art for a device that can distract adjacent vertebral bodies in a minimally invasive manner while providing stable support for the disc space during fusion.